W.P.(C) No.1560/2007 involving a writ petition challenging a tax demand notice. The petitioner challenged Ext.P4 issued for recovering entry tax, though the notice stated the amount was for sales tax. The court relied on O.P.No.434/1996.
The Writ Petition is allowed and Ext.P4 is quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR
THURSDAY, THE 15TH MARCH 2007 / 24TH PHALGUNA 1928 WP(C).No. 1560 of 2007(I)
PETITIONER:
-------------------
P.V.GIRISH, PALLATHERY HOUSE, MOOLAMKUDAM, MATTATHURKUNNU P.O., KODAKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.G.HARIHARAN
SRI.PRAVEEN.H.
RESPONDENTS:
----------------------
1. INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, INVESTIGATION BRANCH, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THRISSUR.
2. THE SALES TAX OFFICER, IRINJALAKUDA.
3. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, (RR), MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MATTATHOOR VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MOHAMMED RAFIQ
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/03/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) NO.1560/2007
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
EXT.P1:- COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE RELATING TO VEHICLE NO.KL8Q-3535.
EXT.P2:- COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXT.P3:- COPY OF THE ORDER NO.27062/S2/2005/RD DT.11.4.05 OF THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA.
EXT.P4:- COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE NO.K.DIS 6971/05/62 DT.30.10.06 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXT.P5:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT.20.12.06 FILED BY THE PETITIONER.
/TRUE COPY/
tss
K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, J.
W.P.(C) NO. 1560 OF 2007-I
JUDGMENT
The petitioner challenges Ext.P4 notice issued for recovering entry tax from him. Though, in Ext.P4 the amount to be recovered is stated to be sales tax, the learned Government Pleader, upon instructions, submitted that it is actually entry tax. So, in view of the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in O.P.No.434/1996 and connected cases, the Writ Petition is allowed and Ext.P4 is quashed.
15th March, 2007.
K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE.
Nm/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the requirement of notice alleging sales tax in Ext.P4 permits recovery of entry tax.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
O.P.No.434/1996Followed¶31
1 provisions across 1 enactments
P.V.GIRISH
INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, INVESTIGATION BRANCH, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THRISSUR
THE SALES TAX OFFICER, IRINJALAKUDA
DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, (RR), MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT
THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MATTATHOOR VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT
K.Balakrishnan Nair
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
